Bibliographic record
Abstract
Study Abroad programs are designed to provide a variety of learning opportunities for students. Experiencing firsthand the culture, environment, and/or industry is often described as the most memorable benefit by those who study for a quarter or semester in another country. Unfortunately, it is difficult to share this learning experience with classmates and family members who are back at home. One solution that has been implemented with the College's Study Abroad program at The Ohio State Univ., is to design a web site that chronicles the experiences and activities of students while they are abroad. In addition to the photos and stories being contributed from abroad, classmates and other individuals from the home institution can submit questions and participate in threaded discussions with those abroad. For example, students at home can post questions regarding an upcoming tour location and utilize the responses and photos for a class they are attending. Finally, being able to review experiences from previous trips is an outstanding strategy for promoting the program to new students. Online experiences from the Dominican Republic and England programs are available at: http://cfaes.ohio-state.edu/studyabroad .
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".